Would you back a Pateron/Kickstarter for Smiteworks?

[Frunobulax]

Yes
No
Depends

[JeffKnight]

Would definitely depend on what it offered. I'm already an Ultimate license owner. What *might* seal the deal for me would be premium/professional rulesets for systems like Codex (Battlestar Galactica), 2d20 (Conan/Star Trek Adventures), and the like.

[Full Bleed]

Patreon : No

I don't think that platform suits a company/project like this.

Kickstarter : Depends on the campaign.

I know that they've considered launching FGU with a Kickstarter. But, at this point, it wouldn't really be to just "improve/update FG." It would be more to promote and distribute FGU as it crosses the finish line. They are being extra careful about not over-hyping it or putting out release dates they might not meet. It's a conservative approach that I find refreshing.

[Xorn]

FG gets support from me through modules now as I'm a 5E D&D player. That said I would consider a Kickstarter if it was offering something I thought was worth it. I'm not sure what that would be though. I'd probably chip in to push FGU through.

[Andraax]

You're probably going to have to pay for a FGU upgrade anyway, if a Kickstarter gets you that upgrade for free, then you're basically just paying in advance for something that you would pay for anyway...

[JeffKnight]

Patreon : No

I don't think that platform suits a company/project like this.

Kickstarter : Depends on the campaign.

I know that they've considered launching FGU with a Kickstarter. But, at this point, it wouldn't really be to just "improve/update FG." It would be more to promote and distribute FGU as it crosses the finish line. They are being extra careful about not over-hyping it or putting out release dates they might not meet. It's a conservative approach that I find refreshing.

Agreed. Patreon would be something extra, not included with the "release."

Kickstarter, would very much depend on the campaign. Rulesets? Maybe. Extra content? Probably not. Finish Unity? I don't think they'd do this, as it would tie them to a timeline.

[LordEntrails]

I don't see what a Kickstarter would do. SW has already been adding FG developers. Maybe they could add more, but that wouldn't mean it would shorten the development time because you would then have a bunch of people you have to bring up to speed on FG and then you have to spend time managing all those people and they have to spend effort communicating with each other.

Software development is not (in my limited experience) something that benefits from economy of scale.

[JohnD]

I would back a Kickstarter depending on what it is for. I'd love Rolemaster updated and Castles and Crusades to have some added functionality. I will support a Kickstarter for Unity depending on the terms/offer/costs. If/when there is a Kickstarter, I strongly believe that backers should get things that are not available to non-backers after the fact.

On the other hand, as an owner of all the official 5e content, almost all of the Rolemaster and C&C stuff, plus a smattering of Savage Worlds stuff, miscellaneous token and map packs... so in some ways I think I'm already doing my part given most of what I have has never been used beyond a cursory 5-minute click through.

[Raz_Kabooz]

Yes depending on what is offered. I agree with the others that throwing money at something isn't always an answer and paying for current materials already available is a great way to support the product.

[Andraax]

https://qph.ec.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-377fd33fe9c5e86e8e765359f30a9ec7

[Talyn]

I'd love Rolemaster updated and Castles and Crusades to have some added functionality.

As would I but neither of those are SmiteWorks rulesets; they (and by "they" I mean Moon Wizard) only maintain them when a client / CoreRPG update breaks something. Talk to @Andraax up there, he's the new C&C dev. ::wink wink nudge nudge:: Which means a Kickstarter wouldn't do anything for those.

[JohnD]

As would I but neither of those are SmiteWorks rulesets; they (and by "they" I mean Moon Wizard) only maintain them when a client / CoreRPG update breaks something. Talk to @Andraax up there, he's the new C&C dev. ::wink wink nudge nudge:: Which means a Kickstarter wouldn't do anything for those.

None of that matters to me; those are the things I would support regardless of the behind the scenes stuff.

[Frunobulax]

Well, Dilbert aside, for half a century a slew of entire books have been written about the topic of productivity versus number of people, and it's very controversial. We certainly won't resolve it here. All I can say is that all the research seems to say is "it depends". Certainly in SOME cases, adding people is a terrible idea. And just as certainly adding people has saved some projects from certain doom. It depend heavily on a huge number of variables, from the size and scope of the project to the personalities of the managers, the morale of the team, how well new team members fit, and so on. Outside the company we have almost none of this information so it's useless to speculate. We don't know how many people, the exact project goals, how it's organized, or any of that stuff. And even if we did, few of the variables are based on human foibles and therefore not predictable at all.

I just posted the poll to see what people thought. I know it was extremely vague, but I did that partly because I had to (having no details) and partly on purpose. I hope the discussion here is interesting and hopefully helps Smiteworks make a decision one way or the other, or maybe post their own poll about what features and improvements people want most (if they haven't already).

[Trenloe]

...or maybe post their own poll about what features and improvements people want most (if they haven't already).
https://fg2app.idea.informer.com/

[Jay_NOLA]

It depends on what is offered.

With a Kickstarter if it is a ruleset, module, etc. that I'm interested in and do want to get I would. If it was the new Unity version I'd do a Kickstarter if I could upgrade that way at decent price.

Patreon is the same way and I'd only support Pateron if I knew I was getting something I wanted and could use with each monthly fee. So if the Patreon was going to be geared to something, like a particular game system I wasn't interested in or overly pricey I'd skip it.

[Frunobulax]

Thanks, Trenloe - I did know about that site but hadn't been able to get it to work until now. I will add my votes. You still may want to sit down with the team and figure out which, say, 20 or so features you are considering the most and then put a poll here. The site is great but there are hundreds of suggestions.

[Nulk]

No. As an Ultimate License owner and purchaser of a vast array of FG product already, this is simply asking me for more money with no additional benefits as a consumer that I would not already pay for.
If the existing business model of licenses and store bought purchases is not providing the cash flow for ongoing support or development, then the business model itself needs changing.

But at this time, I think everything is in order, there seems to be a constant stream of new customers, new products, development with the current architecture, as well as development of a product that will take FG into the future, and see that no change is necessary from this standpoint.

[Frunobulax]

Well, for those of you voting vehemently "no", I'll just point out that in no way, shape, or form does something like this really affect the status quo business model in this case. It's just an additional/alternative means of funding. I'm sure anything developed would still be made available for sale in the normal way so no one is forced to back anything they don't want to. Usually, backers may get discounts, bundles, or early access, but nothing game-based that other people can't get. Just live some people subscribe to HBO and other people choose to buy movies individually, no one's preference interferes with anyone else's.

[LordEntrails]

I know you intentionally left the survey vague. But doing that has also meant that it's difficult to understand what benefit there might be in funding something through KS. You say it wouldn't change the status quo, but then say it would be an alternative means of funding. Funding what?

As mentioned, I don't see how it would help Unity development. And if it's for rulesets or modules, then either if it's WotC stuff it's not needed. Possibly for PF or other systems, but most third party modules aren't really done through SW and some of those do KS's anyway.

So, it seems like you are trying to get at something, but I don't understand what you are really wanting to get at.

[Nulk]

I understand the funding model, being pay upfront to support development or product creation and in return receive xyz product (or service) upon completion for your patronage. However, in the current instance I don't see that this is required or needed.

If Smiteworks came out and said, "Hey we want to create this fantastic Unity system, but can't stump up cash for development" then I would fully be on board with a kickstarter, but I currently see no value to this model for this situation.

On a side note; I didn't vehemently vote "no". A survey was raised, and 'No' was an option. I voted based upon the question posed and I offered the reasons for my response on the subject. If I voted 'yes' I would still have provided an explanation for my reasoning.

[Uraence]

I think the main point being asked is that if SM got a large influx of cash they could hire either more programmers or higher skilled programmers. Either way the hope is to get FGU released sooner than later and hopefully with more features.

[Andraax]

I think the main point being asked is that if SM got a large influx of cash they could hire either ... higher skilled programmers.

Ouch.

[Uraence]

That's not a dig at anyone on the team. I almost put in another sentence about it because I knew someone would misconstrue the meaning.

Not saying there isn't talent on the team, but there is always someone out there with more talent and more skill. Those people usually demand a higher pay rate. You can't hire top end skill without lots of money.

A 3rd string NFL Football player is a highly talented athlete, but they are not the same skill level as someone like Payton Manning was. They are both very talented, but one of them has much more skill and can command more money.

[JohnD]

I think your hole is getting deeper with the attempt to clarify. :D

[Uraence]

Don't see how, but read it how you like. I know what I meant and mean by it.

There's always someone more talented. Saying someone is more talented or skilled is completely different than saying someone else is lacking talent or skill.

It's also good business to always try to find people more talented than yourself. To think there's no one better than you is pure arrogance.

[LordEntrails]

Again, I don't think the time it takes to develop FGU is really about money. Therefore I don't see a KS being useful because it really just raises money.

You all do know that SW has an open job listing for a Unity Network developer right? They are hiring where they see the need, and there is an ideal team size for such a development project. Besides, there is also an argument not to grow the company beyond what is sustainable past the development of FGU.

We all want FGU as soon as it's ready. It's hard to wait for all of us. I had dreams of it being announced at GenCon :) But I encourage faith in SmiteWorks. They continue to make reasonable decisions, they continue to listen to us (and I'm sure they consider everyone's opinions that are expressed here and elsewhere). They haven't led us astray yet, lets keep the faith :)

[Honken]

I would probably pitch in money into a Kickstarter, but I am definitely more interested in support for more non D20 stuff then more DnD. More width.

/H

[Kazander]

No, because the only reason I even have FG licensing is because of Carl's TableTop Connect project. I don't like FG in it's current form and don't use it. I supported Carl and his vision through Kickstarter. Right now, I feel like I'm already deep in the hole with nothing I consider useful to show for it. It was a risk with Kickstarter, yes, but that doesn't mean I'm going to throw more money at it.

[vodokar]

I think that SmiteWorks running a kickstarter to support ruleset development wouldn't really happen as they have a small team and don't want to devote any resources to development of new rulesets. After all, it isn't just the launch of a ruleset, but the lifetime support for it, as well. They have their hands full with what they already have.

It's about time that a discussion was had around if the community would support community developers thru kickstarter, patreon, whatever, to get a ruleset project off the ground that they want. Community developers made 98% of the rulesets that exist. Likely more would be made, if support was given for it.

[celestian]

I think that SmiteWorks running a kickstarter to support ruleset development wouldn't really happen as they have a small team and don't want to devote any resources to development of new rulesets.

The purpose of a kickstarter (as I see it) is to get more resources to develop said features.

[Frunobulax]

If Smiteworks came out and said, "Hey we want to create this fantastic Unity system, but can't stump up cash for development" then I would fully be on board with a kickstarter, but I currently see no value to this model for this situation.

The truth is that we just don't have any real information to base guesses on. Smiteworks is being close-lipped, which is fine and probably a good idea. I don't fault them for it! I have been in similar situations and keeping your mouth shut is generally best practice. Still, if we want to speculate just for fun... we know they are at least *considering* a crowdfunding campaign for the Unity version, so they clearly don't think it's a terrible idea and at least some of them think it would help. As I said before, there are way too many variables for us to say one way or the other. all we can say is that they haven't outright rejected the idea, which means they see some potential merit. That tells me that for their specific situation, whatever it is, the team size or time frame is not necessarily wrong for adding new people or funding.

[Frunobulax]

I think that SmiteWorks running a kickstarter to support ruleset development wouldn't really happen as they have a small team and don't want to devote any resources to development of new rulesets. After all, it isn't just the launch of a ruleset, but the lifetime support for it, as well. They have their hands full with what they already have.

Well, as for the "lifetime support" for rulesets, that depends on which ruleset. The D&D sets clearly get the most development work, which is not surprising and fair enough since clearly they are most popular. Other rulesets, such as RMC, get no more support than this forum and zero money on development/improvement, so to say "lifetime support" is a little inaccurate.


It's about time that a discussion was had around if the community would support community developers thru kickstarter, patreon, whatever, to get a ruleset project off the ground that they want. Community developers made 98% of the rulesets that exist. Likely more would be made, if support was given for it.

I agree completely about that. Rulesets are definitely a little different than the underlying application in that they only really need to be written once and then can have relatively modest resources devoted to bug fixing and minor improvements. So, more than a new version of the main app, they would lend themselves to crowdfunding as kind of a "one shot" deal. Now, it's an interesting legal question as to whether a third party could develop and sell a ruleset for use with FG without the permission of Smiteworks, but that doesn't really matter since there's no reason to NOT work with them. I suppose I could go out and start my own Kickstarter named "Kickstarter to hire a Lua programmer to update the RMC ruleset for FG to CoreRPG and add many enchancements to it", but that's a bit more work than I feel like doing. I really wish Smiteworks would do it, though.

I most definitely would *generously* support such an effort (RMC Ruleset) through a crowdfunding site. I'd give $100 or more for an improved ruleset that was available to backers (only). I believe in supporting people who make the stuff I want. That may sound like a stupid amount of money, but an ultimate license costs more than that, and when I divide up my entertainment dollars, $100 for a near-infinite number of entertainment hours is a super deal. I would only be able to see about 10 hours of movies in the theatre for that. People often whine about the price of games but never look at it form a cost-per-hour perspective.

[LordEntrails]

If there was a ruleset I wanted (which there isn't) that had a KS to be developed by SW or some of the trusted community devs, I would back it.

[MadCar_1]

Yes if it added the following:

1. Native Mac support

2. Improved import and export capabilities. Still too difficult to develop homebrew content.
a) Wish there were a simple Excel or CSC import/export feature for adding lists, story elements, NPCs, ....
b) Wish there were interoperability between D&D Beyond and FG

3. Improved network performance

[Zacchaeus]

I agree completely about that. Rulesets are definitely a little different than the underlying application in that they only really need to be written once and then can have relatively modest resources devoted to bug fixing and minor improvements.

I'm sure Moon Wizard would completely agree with you that over the last couple of years the time spent maintaining rulesets is negligible and Ikeal has spent almost no time at all over the last few months maintaining the SW ruleset. :)

[Myrdin Potter]

A lot of time time on rule sets has been driven by two things (which benefit all of us). 1) additional functionality added to the main program which translates to needed changes in the rule sets to be compliant. Generally you see no improvement but if that plumbing is not done, the rule set breaks. 2) clean-up and extension of capability like the concentration check added to 5e this coming uodate. Changes need to be communicated to other rule set developers. We also have seen additional functionality like the ability to create spells and classes within 5e. Every toy 5e gets added seems to spill over to other rulesets.

So I think undercalling ruleset effort is not wise. There are not a lot of people that know lua and can develop a ruleset as well.

What I would participate in a kickstarter for:

1) proper editor for modules including a WYSIWYG editor for reference manuals.

2) Additional rulesets that are too obscure for the percentage of sales model to provide enough incentive for.

[donpaulo]

My answer is

MOST LIKELY (like 90%)

I chose depends because YES is not totally accurate

[celestian]

What I would participate in a kickstarter for:

1) proper editor for modules including a WYSIWYG editor for reference manuals.



I would kill for that ;)

[Mellock]

SmiteWorks has said a few times there a kickstarter is a possibility when FG Unity becomes a product. I've already budgeted that in, so yes, I would back. I would also back other kickstarters, but I also haven't forgotten when someone tried a kickstarter-like campaign on Verkami for a FG ruleset editor. I backed that one, and even though a lot of people said it was a good idea, it failed miserably. So there's that.

[Xydonus]

SmiteWorks is a business offering a commercial product that many of us have bought into, are currently providing support with our wallets and continue to be an active presence on the community with games masters who bring in players who potentially may one-day purchase FG for themselves, as has happened in my case.

I think I provide plenty of support as it is for a company that seems to be doing rather well for itself especially with the recent procurement of big licenses. So I don't think I'd give anything more in a kickstarter, I've got to support myself at some stage... :D

[lsujonno]

Absolutely.

As someone who is anxiously awaiting FGU, I'd be happy to put my money where my mouth is.

[Frunobulax]

Glad to see that "Yes, definitely" is at over 55% and "Maybe" at 23%. That's 79% who would either do it or at least consider it. Definitely indicates a lot of interest to me.

[jcprice]

Depends ...

On what in particular is involved. In general, I'm keen to support the product, so I'm almost a "yes".

[damned]

Well, as for the "lifetime support" for rulesets, that depends on which ruleset. The D&D sets clearly get the most development work, which is not surprising and fair enough since clearly they are most popular. Other rulesets, such as RMC, get no more support than this forum and zero money on development/improvement, so to say "lifetime support" is a little inaccurate.



I agree completely about that. Rulesets are definitely a little different than the underlying application in that they only really need to be written once and then can have relatively modest resources devoted to bug fixing and minor improvements.

Moon Wizard updates a lot of rulesets other than 5e every time there is an update to the engine or to CoreRPG. Might not be adding new features but is still supporting them.

[ColinBuckler]

My answer has to be depends.... too many unknown factors to consider at this point.

I can see Kickstarters to fund new rule sets with the promise of extra modules...etc as mile stones working.....

A kickstarter for FGU not so much. Yes a free upgrade is good and i would possible contribute to it to speed the process along for FGU. I suppose early access to FGU could also be dangled carrot.

[Black Hammer]

No. I chunked down a solid bit of cash for an Ultimate license and more for the modules and rulesets I've purchased, and did so with the understanding that the fairly steep entry cost included ongoing support for software.

[Bidmaron]

These poll threads are very irritating. Every time someone votes it shows up unread.

[Moon Wizard]

Closing thread. I may start closing poll threads after a month exactly for that reason.

Regards,
JPG